David Syphers <dsyphers_at_u.washington.edu> writes: > Okay... this would be grammatically correct. However, I'm curious why the > original poster believes the current version to be unclear, since it is also > grammatically correct. (Omitting "that" or "which" at the beginning of a > restrictive relative clause is very common in English.) Yes, but this is pretty special to English; I know three other languages and English is the only one that leaves the _necessary_ relative clause (as in this case) without pronouns or other distinction. I'd agree that is correct, and from a knowledgable point of view, it is desirable to omit the commas and the "which", but I understand that less skilled non-native speakers may have difficulties understanding the whole paragraph. -- Matthias Andree Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95 (PGP/MIME preferred)Received on Sun Oct 17 2004 - 10:02:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:17 UTC